If the Sonoma County Board of Supervisors’ plan to reinstitute an independent advisory committee on pension reforms wasn’t a politically-motivated proposal it became one after labor union leader Lisa Maldonado attacked it during a public hearing this week.
“This is a political issue masked as a serious issue,” Maldonado, field director for the county’s largest public employee union (SEIU 1021) said. She charged the supervisors were “intimidating workers ahead of the next negotiations” by appointing a pension review committee with “anti-tax groups and people who don’t believe in government.”
Supervisors David Rabbitt and Lynda Hopkins took extra turns at the public microphone to scold Maldonado. “Those were unfortunate comments, just ridiculous,” said Rabbitt.
“Who in this room does not believe in government?” Hopkins asked. “We want (a committee) as independent as possible and, yes, with labor (representatives) but no conflicts.”
A previous citizen’s panel worked through 2015-16 and adopted a series of recommendations to address the county’s $800 million unfunded pension liability that continues to worsen. After submitting its final report, the five-member panel was dismissed last June.
Citing more work to be done, the supervisors this week tentatively approved creating a permanent independent pension review committee with 5-7 members. Final details were assigned to supervisors Rabbitt and Shirlee Zane, working as a pension ad hoc committee. Their work will be the subject of a future board meeting.
“We want as transparent and as consistent reporting as possible,” said supervisor James Gore, endorsing the idea of a new permanent committee. “This is about taking care of our biggest resource — our human resources, our workers.”
Supervisor Susan Gorin was critical of the approach, saying the powers of the new proposed body were unclear. “Is this like the Planning Commission? Will there be staff and how much will it cost?” she asked.
Sonoma County’s pension fund woes are not unique and are part of a fiscal crisis nearly all local governments face in California.
Rabbitt and Zane have been working since 2011 as the ad hoc committee to “address the unsustainable course” of pension costs. The county government leaders already have enacted a series of pension fund reforms including introducing a reduced pension plan for newer employees at an estimated savings of $178 million. The consensus is that more reforms are needed to curtail or solve annual increases to the $800 million pension hole which was severely impacted by the 2008 recession and a 2002 pension enhancement package.
During the most recent labor group negotiations, county employees agreed to pay slightly higher contributions toward their own retirement and the supervisors also made a one-time $3.5 million payment toward the massive unfunded liabilities.
The newly reformed independent panel is expected to further pursue a “hybrid retirement model” that would consist of a defined-benefit and defined-contribution components.
Also, county staff will soon deliver a State of the Retirement System report. The new independent panel is expected to meet on a regular schedule with all meetings subject to the Brown Act public meeting law.
Rebecca Johns, a member of the former independent panel, endorsed the new approach. “This is a complex issue with a steep learning curve,” she said, encouraging the supervisors to ask her and all previous panel members to join the new committee.
Ken Churchill, leader of the New Sonoma County taxpayer group endorsed the progress by the previous committee and supervisor ad hoc committee on addressing the pension fund deficits.
Bob Williamson, of the Sonoma County Employees’ Retirement Association, supported the proposed scope of the new panel as a “future looking item and not just a review of history.” He urged the supervisors to consider broadening the independent panel’s role during labor negotiations. He also suggested the supervisors consider adding oversight of the county’s health insurance costs to the panel’s mission.
